Is "globalist" the most meaningless term of all time?

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

IMO, anyone who supports stupid shyt like the EU Zone, or is against basic soveriegn shyt like enforcing immigration laws

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Nah "Neoliberal" takes the cake.

Neoliberal has a meaning, it just got overused by people who didn't know what it meant.

This is our neoliberal nightmare: Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, an...

So what exactly is neoliberalism, and how is it different from classical liberalism, whose final manifestation came under Keynesianism?

Neoliberalism believes that markets are self-sufficient unto themselves, that they do not need regulation, and that they are the best guarantors of human welfare. Everything that promotes the market, i.e., privatization, deregulation, mobility of finance and capital, abandonment of government-provided social welfare, and the reconception of human beings as human capital, needs to be encouraged, while everything that supposedly diminishes the market, i.e., government services, regulation, restrictions on finance and capital, and conceptualization of human beings in transcendent terms, is to be discouraged.

When Hillary Clinton frequently retorts—in response to demands for reregulation of finance, for instance—that we have to abide by “the rule of law,” this reflects a particular understanding of the law, the law as embodying the sense of the market, the law after it has undergone a revolution of reinterpretation in purely economic terms. In this revolution of the law persons have no status compared to corporations, nation-states are on their way out, and everything in turn dissolves before the abstraction called the market.

One way to sum up neoliberalism is to say that everything—everything—is to be made over in the image of the market, including the state, civil society, and of course human beings.

 

[ogc163]

Neoliberal has a meaning, it just got overused by people who didn't know what it meant.

This is our neoliberal nightmare: Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, an...

Yeah this is an example of what I meant by Neoliberalism taking the cake. Classical liberalism final manifestation was Keynesianism? I've heard Milton Friedman, Hillary Clinton, and even FDR being called neoliberals. From intellectual to intellectual I don't know if that shyt is going to be defined as something represented by Monetarism, Keynesianism, Supply Side Economics, or anything else under the sun.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Yeah this is an example of what I meant by Neoliberalism taking the cake. Classical liberalism final manifestation was Keynesianism? I've heard Milton Friedman, Hillary Clinton, and even FDR being called neoliberals. From intellectual to intellectual I don't know if that shyt is going to be defined as something represented by Monetarism, Keynesianism, Supply Side Economics, or anything else under the sun.

How you ripping on the definition of neoliberalism by ripping on a definition of classical liberalism?

Calling FDR a neoliberal makes no sense to me. Yes, I can see Friedman as helping to inspire neoliberalism (while not being a neoliberal himself) and Clinton as embodying it.

It's basically caping for an ubercapitalist, free-markets narrative, but with a powerful, controlling state. The twist is that the state is servant to the markets. Rather than a large state that controls the markets or a small state that leaves the markets alone, you have markets that control a large state.

 

[TTT]

The problem with the term neo-liberal is evident in that almost 2 paragraph definition. It looks a lot like fitting the definition to the candidate or set group of policies attached to them. The first time i cam across the term was in reference to IMF/WB inspired changes in mostly developing countries that were trying to reform in the 70s and 80s. The programs would normally involve the abandonment of protectionist trade policy, subsidies of industries, social welfare payments and a general policy that favored import substitution industrialization. These countries often had chronic budget deficits and also current account deficits and eventually had no option but to follow IMF dictates because they could not access credit markets. In the US there are some policies that run contrary to the ideology attached to the candidates, I often come across Republicans who laud JFK for cutting taxes but do not talk about Reagan raising them at points. There are people who also mention that FDR moved away from protectionist trade policies which is a feature of the neo-liberal agenda the IMF forces developing countries to undertake.

 

[ill]

IMO, anyone who supports stupid shyt like the EU Zone, or is against basic soveriegn shyt like enforcing immigration laws

Agreed w this. Basically people that want a global agenda regardless of how it affects sovereign nations or things at a local level. George Soros is the most “globalist” person that comes to mind.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Agreed w this. Basically people that want a global agenda regardless of how it affects sovereign nations or things at a local level. George Soros is the most “globalist” person that comes to mind.

EU zone is the clearest demonstration of the failures of aimless globalism. It's been a net negative for all of its member states besides Greece. They could have taken its best parts (Schenzen zone) with none of its worst (shadow govt, common currency). I thought it was a net win for Germany but it's backfired on them too.

 

[mbewane]

I thiught it was code for jews

Anti-Jew propaganda in the end of the 19th/early 20th in Europe constantly portrayed Jews as indeed "globalists", in the sense not tied to one nation (remember that the concept of nation-state was born in Europe at that time, and that Jews were a diaspora), thus making them even more so "enemies". But it also included artists, the economic and especially cultural elite (what would be "disconnected liberals" now, in part). Kind of outdated now in Europe though.

I guess all that tradition reached the US too.

 

[88m3]

IMO, anyone who supports stupid shyt like the EU Zone, or is against basic soveriegn shyt like enforcing immigration laws

lol you really got red pilled huh fakkit?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

lol you really got red pilled huh fakkit?

Dont do this @88m3

You wouldn't get this bolo on a podcast, let alone face to face. Your voice lacks bass and confidence. Don't let the internet pump you up like Joe Budden friend.

Congrats on becoming the left wing analog of the right wing trolls you have branded the enemy. You are literally no better than a MAGA hat rocker.

 

[Pressure]

IMO, anyone who supports stupid shyt like the EU Zone, or is against basic soveriegn shyt like enforcing immigration laws

When has this been the case?

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

When has this been the case?

When Dems create sanctuary cities and call for the abolishment of ICE (with no replacement), for example

"Of course we want immigration laws... we just dont want to enforce them"

 

[Pressure]

When Dems create sanctuary cities and call for the abolishment of ICE (with no replacement), for example

"Of course we want immigration laws... we just dont want to enforce them"

And now we're at my main criticism. You are incorrectly classifying changing immigration laws as not enforcing immigration laws. There's nothing illegal about sanctuary cities and it isn't the job of local and state government to enforce federal law. As it stands I cannot recall a time in modern American history where immigration laws were not being enforced by those responsible for enforcing them.

 

[African Peasant]

The thread is based on a confusion between the meaning of a word, the fact that it's used as an insult and the relevance of the concept behind the word.

The fact that american edgy teens and crazy right wing folks use socialist or marxist for everything does not mean that those words are meaningless.

Globalist has a meaning.

A globalist is someone who advocates globalization. What these folks call globalism.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

And now we're at my main criticism. You are incorrectly classifying changing immigration laws as not enforcing immigration laws. There's nothing illegal about sanctuary cities and it isn't the job of local and state government to enforce federal law. As it stands I cannot recall a time in modern American history where immigration laws were not being enforced by those responsible for enforcing them.

So you don't want local/state govts to enforce federal law... and yes, harboring illegal immigrants is 100% illegal

And you support the abolition of the federal agency that enforces immigration law

But you are pro immigration law enforcement. By who exactly?